What the media won't tell you about Flynn

Media outlets such as the NYT and WP have been full of stories and editorials recounting that 

Michael Flynn pled guilty not once but twice before a federal judge, 

and why it would be such a terrible thing now to drop the chsrge against him to which he pled guilty.

NYT: 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/07/opinion/michael-flynn-charges-dropped.html

WP: 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-judge-should-look-skeptically-at-barrs-latest-effort-to-rescue-another-trump-crony/2020/05/08/e9d8c17a-90c0-11ea-a9c0-73b93422d691_story.html

Those prime outlets are not telling you, at least not to date, that 

Flynn has made publicly available a detailed explanation of just WHY he pled guilty, why those pleas were wrong.

That explanation is a 12-page PDF file, put on the public court docket for his case as Document 160-23.

You can find that document by doing a web search on

michael flynn courtlistener

Clicking on the top hit, at least currently, yields the docket, in order starting with the earliest entry.

You can reverse that order by clicking the button with a 9 above a 1.

In any case, you can then find the docket entry identified above.

That gets you to the official, formally filed copy of Flynn's declaration: "Declaration of Michael T. Flynn".

You can more simply find the declaration at the website of his attorney, Sidney Powell, here: 

<a href="https://sidneypowell.com/media/declaration-of-michael-t-flynn/">

https://sidneypowell.com/media/declaration-of-michael-t-flynn/</a>

Note especially its paragraphs 23, 29, 33-34, 38-39, and 42.

Getting back to the media, I think it is inconscionable for media outlets to prattle on and on about the fact that he has in the past pled guilty, without pointing out that he has given a very plausible explanation of why that was an understandable mistake.

Getting back to Flynn, he served 33 years in the military, serving with the highest distinction in some of its most sensitive positions, holding its highest security clearances.

He certainly has earned, in spades, the benefit of the doubt.

When I read, as I do, the media quoting various legal experts asking 

"Why should he be treated any differently than a drug dealer?", 

I can't help but think 

"These guys are really fucked up".

_______________

Beyond the print outlets cited above, there is CNN, e.g. this news report and analysis from Wolf Blitzer, Jeffrey Toobin, and Jim Sciutto. 

https://youtu.be/b0nDiZrXNy4

Things to note: 

1. They totally ignore Flynn's own explanation cited above about the circumstances that led to the statements they so gleefully criticize. Notice the rising inflection and emphasis they use as they keep repeating "He LIED!" One might wonder why they say that so often without ever even mentioning his explanation. Talk about one-sided reporting!

2. Their legal analyst, Toobin, misstates the main justification used for dropping the charges. 

Toobin, at 5:00 in the video, misstates the DOJ argument by saying their argument is that "Even if he did lie, it was not a legitimate investigation." 

In fact, there is justification for that argument, as the case agent for the Crossfire Razor investigation had previously recommended that it be closed.

In any case, DOJ's argument was over the issue of materiality.

See the second paragraph of the government's motion to withdraw, Document 198 on the Court's docket

(an argument much expanded later in the document).

--------

For an amplification of the above pro-Flynn argument, 

see this 2020-06-18 Gregg Jarrett opinion piece: 

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/michael-flynn-guilty-plea-gregg-jarrett

"Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn pleaded guilty, so he must be guilty. 

This is the canard repeated ad nauseam by the multitude of Flynn critics on social media and among so-called elite journalists....

[But] roughly 20 percent of exonerated defendants in the U.S. have pleaded guilty[!] ...

The 20 percent figure comes from the National Registry of Exonerations, which meticulously tracks defendants who have been falsely accused and/or wrongfully convicted since 1989. 

Among 2,551 known exonerations, more than 500 pleaded guilty. 

Like the Flynn case, the false pleas were often coerced under threat by ruthless and dishonest law enforcement."